Recommended Posts

AI likes turning too much and is prone to put itself into irons during close combat.

Players frequently avoiding/running from even matches, maybe such abehaviour could cost standing (or xp) at a later stage. I think it is very important for this game to adress this, people should be willing to take risks and battle each other and not the AI. This will enhance the economy due to greater loss of assets and lessens the urgency to optimise the AI.

Not knowing anything about a battle I enter, at least there should be some rough estimation when hovering the mouse over the symbol.

EDIT:

AI accuracy and range with carronades. It does hit at 650 yards? with carronades. Generall accuracy of ranged shots, a player in a trinc successfully shot chain at me at more than 999+ yards?, taking down 10% of my sails. That kind of sniping is far from past realities. Where is the obligatory spread in both cases?

Chaining battles abusing the faster open world travel time or even worse faster loading times to get ahead and trap an opponent who cannot run well since he has to turn and pick up speed while you or a friend is already in position to intercept anew.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

1. Reinforcement "window" is too long, from what I can tell you can join an existing battle at any time. Allies should not literally be able to traverse hundreds of miles to join in an existing fight which leads to second point....

2. Reinforcements sometimes spawn in almost right on top of their opponent. This makes absolutely no sense. If two forces are engaged and 10 minutes later 5 more buddies show up they shouldn't be spawning anywhere even close to the existing belligerents. If Open World time compression is approx. 8 seconds of real time for 10 minutes of game time someone joining a fight even 2 minutes after it is initiated just travelled a distance equal to distance they could travel in 2 and half hours.

3. Bow chaser cannons seem way too accurate at extreme ranges. Maybe someone can provide some hard data to either support or dismiss my notion? It just seems like having a smoothbore cannon fire a cannon ball from the front of a moving platform at a distance of over 1,000m and hope to hit another moving target is a bit too easy now. I mean 1,000M is a pretty far shot given the variables involved and technology....I'd really be shocked if they could hit the stern of a fleeing vessel at those ranges?

I don't belive you are right on muzzle velocity as all souces I have quote it as around a half of equivalent long gun. On accuracy I'm not sure as the shorter barrel would reduce accuracy but the smaller windage would increase it so I'm not sure without doing more research as to which effect won out.

Carronades would also have poor hitting power beyond their short "smashing " range due to the low muzzle velocity, so a better model maybe damage falling off quicker but actual range being longer.

Carronades. Whilst they do seem a little better than they were in the previous version, they still don't feel right. I think part of that is the way you've artificially set their short range by limiting the velocity rather than the accuracy. Firing ball from them is ok, however firing anything else is virtually pointless because the range is so miniscule you literally have to be alongside the target vessel. with grapeshot this isn't so much of an issue, but you cannot hit any higher than the courses on another ship, and that's at the perfect distance and max elevation whilst being the leward vessel. Did you guys experiment at all with giving them a range not much shorter than equivalent "medium" cannon, but having a pretty poor accuracy at all? After all, this is historically why they only had a very short effective range rather than the ball not traveling very far. They also seem to bounce more often which I'm guessing is a byproduct of the lower velocity, which again is a little strange given all the data that has been provided by various sources. If you tried this and it really didn't work for whatever reason then fair enough, I'm just surprised that you artificially limited their range rather than recreating the reason they had a short effective range.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

2. Well, I always get lost in the OW, however since I saw an island I checked it up on google map and then used the directions given on google map that is how I continued my journey and it is pretty easier without going blind.

3. I don't think so i have a 3rd. Edited : AI's are way too OP, what happened is inside my full HP Privateer, I attacked a Pirate Lynx, a simple one, lonely one, so I took his ship's hp to like 10% or so, and then I couldn't hit him anymore or i dont know, and he always shot accurate shots at me not always but most of the time and he freaking got me to sink me eventually because of the water. AI needs a lot nerf or at least for specific this one.

2. Time lag to target guns so long makes it difficult to hit anything unless you are sailing straight and parallel to the target. Shooting whilst turning even at a close target is extremely difficult (for me anyway).

3. Having to sail so close to battles to see if you can join or not. Maybe should mark battles that cant be joined with red swords rather than white swords.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

1) Lack of a clear sense of progression. (What is the point of having fixed starting ports if appropriately level enemy AI do not have a fixed general area around that area where new players can learn how to play the game and interact with the world?)

2) No telescope on OS. (You made a beautiful game and a very large world where we can sail around and explore, but it gets annoying when I spend 10 minutes beating upwind thinking I'm chasing a enemy ai sail on the horizon only to realize once I've gotten close enough that its actually a rock of an island that happens to be sticking up.)

3)UI and fine controls need to be worked on quite a bit. (UI especially, some of it is down right un-intuitive and actually makes for a lot of frustration.

Edit - Since some clarification was asked for on my #3 I will provide a small example:

So the current repair UI looks like this:

The armor repair and the sail repair are self explanatory, 2 repairs for each system. But the rudder, pump, and magazine repairs look like they each have 1 repair, which is not the case. The one repair is shared between the 3 elements. You can only find this out by actually repairing one element. For a player that is playing for the first time and he has a damaged pump and a damaged rudder this might be frustrating if he repairs one item over another thinking he has one repair for each module instead of 1 shared repair for all three modules. This is where the UI is unintuitive in this example.

The UI for the entire game has instances like this where the displayed information is somewhat misleading and can only be figured out by trial and error. This confusion can be avoided by small tweaks to the UI. For instance the above UI can be tweaked by this rough example below. (Please ignore how rough it looks, I'm just using it as an example, not as a finished product)((Hell I'm not even a dev in the game, i'm just trying to help improve it))

So just by a couple of small tweaks the UI become a lot more intuitive to the player base, which makes the game far more "noob" friendly if you will while still maintaining the depth and nuances of the current system.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

OW polars =/= battle instance polars. In battle there is no way in hell that a Trinc can chase down my Surprise against the wind, but in the OW he can. That means that all his friends in Lynxes and lighter frigates can swoop down on the instance with their higher upwind performance and have an unfair chance of catching me.

I understand that OW polars have to offer superior upwind performance in general, but the proportions between ships should be identical. Except in storms, where the heavier ships deserve a very large advantage.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

1. Invisibility. Players are using the invisibility to catch players by surprise and camp near ports. I would suggest removing the Invisibility and make the Invulnerability timer longer giving players time to leave the ports. Also Invisibility is nowhere near realism.

2. No information about deck classes of ships before purchasing. For example: A Brig is Class 6 but can only equip cannons of Class 7-9 which is pretty confusing.

3. Medium cannons do WAY less damage compared to Long cannons. I know the Medium cannons have a lower reload time but I do literately no damage with double balls against ships such as a Bellona, Victory and Santisima (damage dealt of a full double ball broadside with a Surprise was about 3-5%). In this case people will ALWAYS pick Long cannons no matter what because if you are using Medium cannons against someone with Long cannons, you simply get out-damaged by a LOT. So Medium cannons need a bit of tweaking IMHO.

New #3: AI sailing away from the player instead of sailing towards the player. They even do that when they are against the wind making it impossible to catch the AI ship.

Edited June 1, 2015 by Goodblue

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The instance you've mentioned in point 3, I'm not surprised really. Long guns don't do more damage as such, but they do have a better penetration. You'll probably find that with mediums your guns just aren't penetrating but with longs they are. When you're going after something closer to your own class you'll likely find that the mediums do greater damage over time as both will penetrate but the mediums will fire more often than the longs. Try checking the damage log to see if your rounds are penetrating or not with both mediums and longs. It's Ctrl+L if you don't know

Edited June 1, 2015 by Hunter

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The instance you've mentioned in point 3, I'm not surprised really. Long guns don't do more damage as such, but they do have a better penetration. You'll probably find that with mediums your guns just aren't penetrating but with longs they are. When you're going after something closer to your own class you'll likely find that the mediums do greater damage over time as both will penetrate but the mediums will fire more often than the longs. Try checking the damage log to see if your rounds are penetrating or not with both mediums and longs. It's Ctrl+L if you don't know

Hmm so it's probably just me then. Mediums at lower ranks and Longs at higher ranks for the penetration against bigger ships.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Yeah, if you're constantly taking on 3rd rates and larger whilst in a surprise, then you're going to need the longs for the better penetration to get through the thicker hulls that they have. As soon as you get up to using 18lb cannons or higher though it's not so much of an issue except at longer ranges. The 12lb mediums just don't have enough penetration to pierce the SOLs hulls.

2. Time lag to target guns so long makes it difficult to hit anything unless you are sailing straight and parallel to the target. Shooting whilst turning even at a close target is extremely difficult (for me anyway).

3. Having to sail so close to battles to see if you can join or not. Maybe should mark battles that cant be joined with red swords rather than white swords.

Let me add another annoyance to my list and that is the right click mouse to pan the view. Would much prefer right click to use pointer.

Link to post

Share on other sites

As Admin said, let's stay on topic. Please keep to a list format, and let's not discuss items here. If you feel a need to discuss something, please PM the poster, post in an existing thread, or if that doesn't exist, start a new thread if you feel the discussion merits it.